The Abbeville press and banner. [volume] (Abbeville, S.C.) 1869-1924, 1887-12-14
The State of South Carolina,
COUNTY OF ABBEVILLE,
IN THE SUPREME COURTEIGHTH CIRCUIT.
November. Term, 1887.
JOHN E. BROWNLEE,
PLAINTIFF, APPELLANT,
against
JOSEPHINE A. MARTIN, EFT AL,
DEFENDANTS, RESPONDENTS.
Points and Authorities Submitted by Thomas P Cohran in
Behalf of Respondents,

Behalf of Respondents.
Tsrief Statement O Facts.
This action possession Of 1888 acres OF and known as
the On RHes te Pf6 81 Dstsgber Dsg%@ offered
@ s o At T EuS!G eGSny at %
tate consisted of two of land the Home Place. containing
% s s %a f fair ysr an and e defendants Josephine
the cha f6 RTs R Pase at
aes snd f pss nSt sbefRfS beR 1c Sn
an the defendant josephine A. Martin which the atters bid
@ e fS Exeu6 exeeed and delivered to
Brownee title to both places received IRON rl 3 taa
months thereafter the unpaid portion On January 2 1872
the parties I S % be Waf e oo A. Thee
moving between them for this a ed ss transfer
red and te made ID pnt the principal matter dispute
upon the determination of which, the rights OF the pa u
The plaintiffs complaint very brief alleging title and de-
mandng possession Of the River Place The defendant IN er
Of the bid and the S eSespoT s91t s4a of titles @ee to
intended as security the payment of the purchase money a
vanced for her by BroWnlee @ rd n take the Home
Place for the debt then due execute titles the defendant
conveying the the consideration being the surrender
counter claim for the difference between the amount adj
him from sale Of the Home Place. D,ooo 10 t,o
A. Accord and satisfaction by sale OF the 1ole rce u ~
The plaintiff replied BY denying the matters set forth in the de-
and alleging that hs efe Se paner exeee 18th
January 1873 termed contract for m MAJ and
that hs being unable the Of that men
when voluntarily M the and from his
The Presiding Judge decreed for the deenoah's anu w Ills
decision this appeal is taken
Points and Authorities.
This the second appeal this cae The a een
fled the supreme Court the following proposition
is shown that deed absolute on s % r was d S ti # viii
operate only mortgage and cannot be oy any
written into 5 an aOe po4
deraon have been fairly made @ Mt0u tbi: qH
upon the morgagee other words it must amount to
tn. BID 56sbhss @ n %
of the the titles to him I f that Wa m
fer to him. of all defendants rights purchaser Ihe e
THAT for e Ro eu
benefit The asorte 10 jan an
@ the asn showing that absolute
intended The Of e une
Grafton be show to have moved the parties There in the
fse this la yry Iie mporaDt ps poson pnt
Judge finds ha there rae aId h ms ssnn nhg
worthless appellant showing the @ Sgna ma that nature
the agreement transfer of the BID The oRec q taa end no
have been intended conditional sae for both parts ar
The Circuit Judge certain issues to jury and they
found that transfer for the plaintiffs use and
Judge this finding that the transfer
absolute but was intended security to the plaintiff for the
money % Rs of tie e Wl disclose
testimony upon point involving squarey the issue Verac
ty between the witnesses the respective Sides and before we
enter into the discussion of the merits of the case we submit that
where there such direct conflict of testimony this Court Will
rarely the finding of the Circuit Judge , . ~
Being Chancery have the right 10 consider All
the testimony which we have done There conflict in the
testimony and that the Judgment of the Circuit Judge
|" is prhn0 facie right. m
Maner VS.. Wilson, 16 S. G. r. 4S =.
Upon this point indeed upon almost every otaer pont IN
voved this controversy the evidence was confGtg ana
conclusion reached by the Circuit Judge though adverse
that reached by referee must be regarded as pra dce the
correct conclusion.
Field VS.. Hurst 90 S. G. Il. 299. ~
Young VS.. Young filed July 49, 1887 the Circuit
Judge overuled the finding Of the Master upon questions OF 1ac
and dsposng of the appeal theerom the Supreme court
exceptions make questions of fact and as this
held very lately, in the of Pope vs.
|" Montgomery, 24 s. G. r. I'LL ~
1t is incumbent the appellant to show that the
the conclusions of fact reached by the Circuit Judge are either
without any testimony to support hem or mane against
the weight of the evidence = The utmost that be
said conflict in the testimony, and in such case
is this Court rarely if ever nterferes"